On Mon, 18 Sep 2000, Tom Lane wrote: > The Hermit Hacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> I vote for just renaming it to chr(). Any objections? > > > first thing off the top of my head ... was there a reason why it was added > > to contrib/odbc? ignoring the "oracle documentation", is it something > > that is/was needed for ODBC? > > Now that I look, it seems ODBC specifies the function as "char()", > which means contrib/odbc is wrong on that score too :-( > > New proposal: forget ichar(), give the function two entries chr() and > char(). sounds good to me ... chr() == char(), I take it? is there a reason for having both vs just changing char() to chr() in the odbc stuff?
- [HACKERS] ascii to character conversion in postgres Alex Sokoloff
- Re: [HACKERS] ascii to character conversion in post... Karel Zak
- Re: [HACKERS] ascii to character conversion in ... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] ascii to character conversion... Karel Zak
- Re: [HACKERS] ascii to character conver... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] ascii to character c... The Hermit Hacker
- Re: [HACKERS] ascii to charact... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] ascii to cha... The Hermit Hacker
- Re: [HACKERS] ascii to cha... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] ascii to cha... The Hermit Hacker
- odbc (was: Re: [HACKERS] a... Karel Zak
- Re: odbc (was: Re: [HACKER... Tom Lane
- Re: odbc (was: Re: [HACKER... Peter Eisentraut
- Re: [HACKERS] ascii to character conversion... Peter Eisentraut
- Re: [HACKERS] ascii to character conver... Peter Eisentraut
- Re: [HACKERS] ascii to character conversion in post... Alex Sokoloff